Usefulness and Reliability (1 Viewer)

[sonyaleeisapixi]

Re: The Reliability Of Sources; How To Determine Reliability/Usefulness?

Also, all sources are useful to an extent. The context of the application however means a source may be useful for one thing and less so for another

 

[studentcheese]

Re: The Reliability Of Sources; How To Determine Reliability/Usefulness?

You need to know the date of the source and the author (including who the author is and how they were involved in the event or knew about it).

Primary sources are not always reliable. In a study of Alexander the Great, we noticed that there were many authors who exaggerated on Alexander's ability and the large numbers of Persian armies to make Alexander seem more heroic. (coz they were Greek) Try to know the author's relationship to the personality or event.

All sources are useful, but there are some more useful than others Even some biased sources could be useful for providing differing views of an event at the time. Usefulness of a source is determined by how it contributes to our understanding of the personality or event.

 

[Wooz]

Re: The Reliability Of Sources; How To Determine Reliability/Usefulness?

It really depends, and it is up to you the 'historian' (hehe) to analyse the level or reliability.

I remember that alot of WWI sources despite being primary sources were either staged, forms of propaganda, political, controversial background of author, profession of author, or contained bias and so forth.

Secondary sources can bring newer perspectives, hindsight, new historical methodology i.e. use of statistics, etc, perspectives or lenses, commonly held historical views, but it can also bring revisionism which can be dangerous e.g. Irving, Stanley, etc.

 

[DominiqueSydney]

Would they really give us a completely useless source in the HSC? Doubt it.

 

[love.is.around]

MOst sources are useful; however, they can lack reliability, e.g. the source may be bias, the person composing the soucre may be in a distraught emotinal state due to the war. It is psible to make these assumptions, due to your own knowledge of WWI. Thus, your bringing your own knowledge into the exam. This is what markers want!

 

[Kujah]

All sources are unreliable.

 

[Lanina]

definition of perspective , reliability and usefulness

Hey everyone , I was wondering what everyone's understanding of the terms of this titled thread [definition of perspective , reliability and usefulness ]
or what your teachers have taught you what they mean ?

thanks ^__^

 

[Lucid Scintilla]

Re: definition of perspective , reliability and usefulness

Reliability: the accuracy and origins of the source.
Look at bias (creator, purpose), tone.

Usefulness: literally, the usefulness of the source for a particular inquiry. Evaluate content, primary/secondary nature, origin, purpose, limitations, omissions, relevance, bias, reliability, context. Don't ever say a source is totally useless.

Perspective: creator, purpose, context, PoV of historical events.

In comparisons, ask yourself why things are so; such as, why one account varies from another, which is more valid and why, etc.

 

[I am the Law]

Reliability refers to the credibility of the source. In order to establish this, historians must refer to a criteria commonly referred to as 'OURMAP' (origin, usefulness, reliability, motive, audience, perspective)

The origin may infer a motive also contributed to by the audience for which the source is intended. Perspective is afinal component referring specifically to the personal context of the composer, influencing the manner in which they address a particular area. The reliability is then underpinned by the inference of existing bias in relation to its influential contribution on the publication of a source.

An unreliable source, possibly consisting of vast innacuracies may still be considered useful. The reason for this is it may portray varying perspectives existent towards a particular issue within the context of the source. Alternatively it may allow historians to contrast these perspectives and cast doubt upon additional sources, in addition to reinforcing others.

I am aware that this was posted some time ago (LONG time ago) but the reason for my response is to possibly assist currnet individuals with addressing similar questions.

 

[Sunners]

The question you'll normally get is whether or not a historian studying whatever aspect of World War One would find it useful, or in other words could they use it. Reliability refers to is it reliable, can it be relied upon for information.

You ask yourself whether or not it is reliable first and then whether or not it is useful.

 

[atomyka]

from what Ive been doing with my teacher the key words will be usefulness, reliability and perspective. It will always be used to find the usefulness.

Now, there is always issues in a source as none are perfect but it will depend completely on the question and if it is looking for a particular point of view or a generalised answer.

The main aim of your answer should be to paragraph your ideas so quick into on the source/s and what it would involve (eg: author, date, perspective). Then talk about its reliability (bias, what concepts it talks about, what country it is based on and what country it comes from in a main paragraph covering any ways you've been taught in class or wherever. do each source individually and relate back to the question as much as possible.

Then talk about the perspective and nationality of the sources and any opinions that are expressed, bias observed etc etc.

Use your findings to then demonstrate your opinion on the sources usefulness to the question given (normally "for a historian discussing.........") and what could be done to improve the source like using supportive sources if there is lack of clarity or anything like that.

Your final statement should be a 1 or 2 sentence answer (Source A demonstrates a reliability factor but a bias perspective whilst Source B is predominately secondary hindering its reliability but allowing a more generalised perspective on the events taking place. Source A can there fore be considered not useful to a historian studying the subject wihout supporting sources and source B can be considered reasonably useful for the given question.)

REMEMBER!!!: THE RELIABILITY AND PERSPECTIVE DETERMINE THE USEFULNESS AND CAN CAUSE A PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SOURCE TO BE NON-USEFUL TO THE QUESTION!!!